If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I'm working a project that was mostly shot in 4K and will be distributed via YouTube and there are a handful of clips that I want to add digital zooms to (as well as a few 1080 clips to scale up) and I'm wondering if there's a quality difference in the final export between a 4K export where clips are scaled up beyond 100% on occasion or a 2K export where the digital zooms stay under 100% (because of being 4K native). Since the majority of people will never watch it in 4K anyways, if their phone/laptop, etc. chooses to auto playback at 1080p will that look any different than if I just mastered in 1080 in the first place?

IMO, if you're editing on a 4K timeline and keeping the zooms reasonable (175% vs. 300%) then most people will not see a difference, especially if the source footage is high-quality (like CRL).

1080p in a 4K timeline:

- Soft 1080p will be noticeable if the master is 4K and playback is 4K.
- Really good 1080p/2K - like from ARRI - may not be noticeable.

But with all that said if the majority will be watching on their phones/etc. in 1080p then it doesn't really matter. In theory, you should get slightly better quality from the super-sampling but who's going to really notice?

4K masters only matter when you're playing back in 4K on 4K screens.

[When you buy your new C500 Mark II, you can shoot in 6K and have a ball in post.]

I'm working a project that was mostly shot in 4K and will be distributed via YouTube and ... if I just mastered in 1080 in the first place?

Youtube rendering of 1080 is ac1 whereas if you deliver in 1440 ... or higher ... it is vp9 which is a much better compression format and will deliver a much
more detailed look. 1080 to 1440 is not much of a jump and you will notice the difference.